4 ms·
The article mentions several times that the Icelandic form of government lasted longer than the US - if anything I see that as a negative indicator, given how l
by axiom 17y ago
The article mentions several times that the Icelandic form of government lasted longer than the US - if anything I see that as a negative indicator, given how little actual progress occurred during that time. Compare the impact the US system of government has had with the impact the Icelandic form cited in this article had. The indigenous populations of North America and Australia have been around for thousands of years as well, with their "chieftain" systems of government, and similarly they just stagnated.
- Nwallins 17y ago> Compare the impact the US system of government has had with the impact the Icelandic form cited in this article had. The indigenous populations of North America and Australia have been around for thousands of years as well, with their "chieftain" systems of government, and similarly they just stagnated. You really ought to check out Guns, Germs, and Steel by Jared Diamond. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guns,_Germs,_and_Steel#The_theory_outlined http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guns,_Germs,_and_Steel#The_theo... Specifically, he would question your use of the word stagnate.
- axiom 17y agoI've read it, and I think it's silly to ascribe societal success based on the various random incedental facotrs surrounding it.
- Nwallins 17y agoI don't see where randomness comes into his explanation. Rather, I see his explanation for technological success as hinging on massive societies which specialize, which is in turn based on highly developed domestic agriculture, which is in turn based on the East-West axis of Eurasia with origins in the Fertile Crescent and East Asia.
- joe_the_user 17y agoBy "stagnate" you perhaps mean "failed to achieve massive technological progress and massive population growth". If the areas in question lived well and were happy with how they lived, then this would be a good thing. If they lived badly and were miserably, then it would be, indeed, a bad thing. So your comment leaves with the original question of whether life in these societies was desirable or not.